Download the Full Version of textbook for Fast Typing at textbookfull.

com

Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating

Structures Proceedings of the 14th International
Symposium PRADS 2019 September 22 26 2019 Yokohama
Japan Volume III Tetsuo Okada
https://textbookfull.com/product/practical-design-of-ships-
and-other-floating-structures-proceedings-of-the-14th-
international-symposium-
prads-2019-september-22-26-2019-yokohama-japan-volume-iii-
tetsuo-okada/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWNLOAD NOW

Download More textbook Instantly Today - Get Yours Now at textbookfull.com

 Recommended digital products (PDF, EPUB, MOBI) that
you can download immediately if you are interested.

Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures

Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium PRADS 2019
September 22 26 2019 Yokohama Japan Volume I Tetsuo Okada
https://textbookfull.com/product/practical-design-of-ships-and-other-
floating-structures-proceedings-of-the-14th-international-symposium-
prads-2019-september-22-26-2019-yokohama-japan-volume-i-tetsuo-okada/
textboxfull.com

Practical Design of Ships and Other Floating Structures

Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium PRADS 2019
September 22 26 2019 Yokohama Japan Volume II Tetsuo Okada
https://textbookfull.com/product/practical-design-of-ships-and-other-
floating-structures-proceedings-of-the-14th-international-symposium-
prads-2019-september-22-26-2019-yokohama-japan-volume-ii-tetsuo-okada/
textboxfull.com

HCI International 2019 Posters 21st International

Conference HCII 2019 Orlando FL USA July 26 31 2019
Proceedings Part III Constantine Stephanidis
https://textbookfull.com/product/hci-international-2019-posters-21st-
international-conference-hcii-2019-orlando-fl-usa-
july-26-31-2019-proceedings-part-iii-constantine-stephanidis/
textboxfull.com

Stabilization Safety and Security of Distributed Systems

21st International Symposium SSS 2019 Pisa Italy October
22 25 2019 Proceedings Mohsen Ghaffari
https://textbookfull.com/product/stabilization-safety-and-security-of-
distributed-systems-21st-international-symposium-sss-2019-pisa-italy-
october-22-25-2019-proceedings-mohsen-ghaffari/
textboxfull.com
Design User Experience and Usability Application Domains
8th International Conference DUXU 2019 Held as Part of the
21st HCI International Conference HCII 2019 Orlando FL USA
July 26 31 2019 Proceedings Part III Aaron Marcus
https://textbookfull.com/product/design-user-experience-and-usability-
application-domains-8th-international-conference-duxu-2019-held-as-
part-of-the-21st-hci-international-conference-hcii-2019-orlando-fl-
usa-july-26-31-2019-proceedin/
textboxfull.com

Data Privacy Management Cryptocurrencies and Blockchain

Technology ESORICS 2019 International Workshops DPM 2019
and CBT 2019 Luxembourg September 26 27 2019 Proceedings
Cristina Pérez-Solà
https://textbookfull.com/product/data-privacy-management-
cryptocurrencies-and-blockchain-technology-esorics-2019-international-
workshops-dpm-2019-and-cbt-2019-luxembourg-
september-26-27-2019-proceedings-cristina-perez-sola/
textboxfull.com

Security and Trust Management 15th International Workshop

STM 2019 Luxembourg City Luxembourg September 26 27 2019
Proceedings Sjouke Mauw
https://textbookfull.com/product/security-and-trust-management-15th-
international-workshop-stm-2019-luxembourg-city-luxembourg-
september-26-27-2019-proceedings-sjouke-mauw/
textboxfull.com

Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law, Volume 22

(2019) Terry D. Gill

https://textbookfull.com/product/yearbook-of-international-
humanitarian-law-volume-22-2019-terry-d-gill/

textboxfull.com

Algorithmic Game Theory 12th International Symposium SAGT

2019 Athens Greece September 30 October 3 2019 Proceedings
Dimitris Fotakis
https://textbookfull.com/product/algorithmic-game-theory-12th-
international-symposium-sagt-2019-athens-greece-
september-30-october-3-2019-proceedings-dimitris-fotakis/
textboxfull.com
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

Tetsuo Okada
Katsuyuki Suzuki
Yasumi Kawamura Editors

Practical Design
of Ships and Other
Floating Structures
Proceedings of the 14th International
Symposium, PRADS 2019,
September 22–26, 2019,
Yokohama, Japan- Volume III
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering

Volume 65

Series Editors
Marco di Prisco, Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
Sheng-Hong Chen, School of Water Resources and Hydropower Engineering,
Wuhan University, Wuhan, China
Ioannis Vayas, Institute of Steel Structures, National Technical University of
Athens, Athens, Greece
Sanjay Kumar Shukla, School of Engineering, Edith Cowan University, Joondalup,
WA, Australia
Anuj Sharma, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA
Nagesh Kumar, Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Science
Bangalore, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India
Chien Ming Wang, School of Civil Engineering, The University of Queensland,
Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering (LNCE) publishes the latest developments in
Civil Engineering - quickly, informally and in top quality. Though original research
reported in proceedings and post-proceedings represents the core of LNCE, edited
volumes of exceptionally high quality and interest may also be considered for
publication. Volumes published in LNCE embrace all aspects and subfields of, as
well as new challenges in, Civil Engineering. Topics in the series include:
• Construction and Structural Mechanics
• Building Materials
• Concrete, Steel and Timber Structures
• Geotechnical Engineering
• Earthquake Engineering
• Coastal Engineering
• Ocean and Offshore Engineering; Ships and Floating Structures
• Hydraulics, Hydrology and Water Resources Engineering
• Environmental Engineering and Sustainability
• Structural Health and Monitoring
• Surveying and Geographical Information Systems
• Indoor Environments
• Transportation and Traffic
• Risk Analysis
• Safety and Security
To submit a proposal or request further information, please contact the appropriate
Springer Editor:
– Mr. Pierpaolo Riva at [email protected] (Europe and Americas);
– Ms. Swati Meherishi at [email protected] (Asia - except China,
and Australia, New Zealand);
– Dr. Mengchu Huang at [email protected] (China).
All books in the series now indexed by Scopus and EI Compendex database!

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/15087

Tetsuo Okada Katsuyuki Suzuki
• •

Yasumi Kawamura
Editors

Practical Design of Ships

and Other Floating Structures
Proceedings of the 14th International
Symposium, PRADS 2019,
September 22–26, 2019,
Yokohama, Japan- Volume III

123
Editors
Tetsuo Okada Katsuyuki Suzuki
Faculty of Engineering School of Engineering
Yokohama National University The University of Tokyo
Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

Yasumi Kawamura
Faculty of Engineering
Yokohama National University
Yokohama, Japan

ISSN 2366-2557 ISSN 2366-2565 (electronic)

Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering
ISBN 978-981-15-4679-2 ISBN 978-981-15-4680-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4680-8
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721,
Singapore
Preface

The first PRADS (International Symposium on Practical Design of Ships and Other
Floating Structures) was held in Tokyo in 1977, in celebration of the 80th
anniversary of the Society of Naval Architects of Japan (later the Japan Society of
Naval Architects and Ocean Engineers), where 245 delegates from 26 countries
attended and 56 papers were presented. In the preface of the first PRADS pro-
ceedings, the chairman advocated two important principles; one is the emphasis on
the practical application to ship design, and the other is the promotion of interna-
tional mutual understanding through discussions and exchange of information on
practical problems in shipbuilding.
Since then, 42 years have passed, our circumstances and environment
experienced tremendous changes, for example, rapid development of information
technology and computer science, expansion of offshore development, and more
and more emphasis on green shipping and renewable energy. Accordingly, the
topics covered by the subsequent PRADS symposia evolved, but we believe that
the first two principles have been kept in mind throughout by all the participants
like a basso continuo.
Respecting the traditions of these past successful PRADS symposia, we are
proud to organize the 14th PRADS Symposium in Yokohama. Yokohama, located
just south of Tokyo, is the second largest city in Japan by population. The city has
been Japan’s major gateway for international transportation and communication.
Yokohama is also a center of excellence for shipbuilding and offshore engineering,
with many leading universities, research institutes, and shipping companies.
Yokohama is also a tourists’ destination with excellent accessibility from all over
the world.
More than 220 abstracts were accepted. The full papers were peer-reviewed by
two reviewers for each paper, and about 170 papers were finally selected for pre-
sentation. The topics cover hydrodynamics, ship dynamics, structures, machinery
and equipment, design and construction, navigation and logistics, and ocean
engineering.

v
vi Preface

On this opportunity, we would like to express our sincere appreciation to the

main sponsor, ClassNK, and other sponsors, Mitsui O.S.K. Lines Ltd., Mitsubishi
Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Namura Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan Marine United
Corporation, IHI Corporation, and Sumitomo Heavy Industries Marine Engineering
Co., Ltd. In addition, our gratitude is extended to the worldwide reviewers of the
full papers; without whose excellent voluntary works, our high-quality symposium
was not even made possible. Special thanks are also extended to the local orga-
nizing committee members, who devoted themselves to manage everything.
Last but not least, we would like to thank all the delegates for their participation
and invite them to enjoy the symposium as well as this exciting city.

Tetsuo Okada
Katsuyuki Suzuki
Yasumi Kawamura
Organization

Standing Committee

Seizo Motora Professor Emeritus, The University of Tokyo,

(Honorary Chairman) Japan
Yasumi Kawamura Yokohama National University, Japan
(Chairman of Standing
Committee)
Tetsuo Okada Yokohama National University, Japan
(Chairman of PRADS
2019)
Alan J. Murphy Newcastle University, UK
Bas Buchner MARIN (Maritime Research Institute
Netherlands), The Netherlands
Enrico Rizzuto University of Genoa, Italy
Ge (George) Wang Seastel Marine System (USA) LLC, USA
Ilson P. Pasqualino Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Patrick Kaeding University of Rostock, Germany
Quentin Derbanne Bureau Veritas Marine & Offshore, France
Seung-Hee Lee Inha University, Republic of Korea
Sverre Steen Norwegian University of Science
and Technology, Norway
Ulrik D. Nielsen Technical University of Denmark, Denmark
Xiaoming Cheng China Ship Scientific Research Center, China

Local Organizing Committee

Tetsuo Okada (Chairman) Yokohama National University, Japan
Katsuyuki Suzuki The University of Tokyo, Japan
(Vice Chairman)

vii
viii Organization

Yasumi Kawamura Yokohama National University, Japan

(Vice Chairman)
Daisuke Yanagihara Kyushu University, Japan
Kazuhiro Aoyama The University of Tokyo, Japan
Kazuhiro Iijima Osaka University, Japan
Kentaro Kobayashi Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean
Engineers, Japan
Koji Gotoh Kyushu University, Japan
Kunihiro Hamada Hiroshima University, Japan
Motohiko Murai Yokohama National University, Japan
Takanori Hino Yokohama National University, Japan
Tsutomu Fukui ClassNK, Japan
Yasuhira Yamada National Maritime Research Institute, Japan
Yasuyuki Toda Osaka University, Japan
Yoshiaki Hirakawa Yokohama National University, Japan
Yukitaka Yasuzawa Kyushu University, Japan

Honorary Committee
Shinjiro Mishima Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean
Engineers, Japan
Hiroyuki Yamato National Institute of Maritime, Port and Aviation
Technology, Japan
Takanori Kunihiro IHI Corporation, Japan
Yukito Higaki Imabari Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan
Takashi Nakabe Onomichi Dockyard Co., Ltd., Japan
Yoshinori Mochida Kawasaki Heavy Industries, Ltd., Japan
Takashi Ueda Sanoyas Shipbuilding Corporation, Japan
Kotaro Chiba Japan Marine United Corporation, Japan
Tetsushi Soga Shin Kurushima Dockyard Co., Ltd., Japan
Hideshi Shimamoto Sumitomo Heavy Industries Marine
& Engineering Co., Ltd., Japan
Sachio Okumura Tsuneishi Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan
Kensuke Namura Namura Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan
Tetsuro Koga Mitsui E&S Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan
Koji Okura Mitsubishi Shipbuilding Co., Ltd., Japan
Yasuhiko Katoh The Shipbuilders’ Association of Japan, Japan
Junichiro Ikeda Mitsui O.S.K. Lines, Ltd., Japan
Koichi Fujiwara ClassNK, Japan
Masahiko Fujikubo Osaka University, Japan
Shotaro Uto National Maritime Research Institute, Japan
Tetsuo Okada Yokohama National University, Japan
Katsuyuki Suzuki The University of Tokyo, Japan
Contents

Design and Construction

Design Methodology
A Bayesian Network Approach to Evaluate Shipboard Launch
and Recovery Performance in Early-Stage Ship Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
James A. Coller and David J. Singer
Communication of Design Space Relationships Learned
by Bayesian Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Claire Wincott and Matthew Collette
Optimizing Ships Using the Holistic Accelerated Concept
Design Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Roy de Winter, Jan Furustam, Thomas Bäck, and Thijs Muller
A “Fast Track to Approval” Process for Innovative
Maritime Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Stéphane Paboeuf, Arnold de Bruijn, Franz Evegren, Matthias Krause,
and Marcel Elenbaas
A Modified Design Framework Based on Markov Decision Process
for Operational Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
Hao Yuan and David J. Singer
Ship Design and Optimization
IGC Code-Based LNG Filling Limits Computation Using 3D
CAD Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
Seok-Ho Byun, Woo-Sung Kil, Myeong-Jo Son, Jeong-Youl Lee,
and Mi-Ho Park
Developments of a Synthesis Model for FLNG Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Lariuss Zago, Daniel P. Vieira, Yu K. Kam, Raul Dotta,
Rodrigo M. Amarante, and Claudio M. P. Sampaio

ix
x Contents

The First LNG Fuel Train Ferry for St. Petersburg –

Kaliningrad Line . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
Gennadiy Egorov, Alexander Nilva, and Dmitriy Chernikov
Creation of River-Sea Cruise Passenger Vessels
of New Generation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Alexander Egorov, Gennadiy Egorov, and Igor Ilnitskiy
Research on the Accessibility Evaluation of the Cruise Passage
Design Based on Passenger Movement Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Zhan Chen, Wei Cai, Yazhong Wang, and Yigang Wu
Genetic Algorithm Selection for Ship Concept Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156
Adam Sobey, Przemyslaw Grudniewski, and Thomas Savasta
Multi Objective Design of Ships; A Pareto Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
Sander Calisal
Optimal Arrangement Method of a Ship Considering
the Performance Against Flooding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
Ki-Su Kim and Myung-Il Roh
Optimal Design of a Floating Raft Vibration Isolation System
with Multiple Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198
Wenzhang Liu, Wenwei Wu, and Xuewen Yin
A Study of Multi-Objective Optimization for Propulsion
Performance and Cargo Capacity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209
Yasuo Ichinose, Yusuke Tahara, Tomoki Takami, Azumi Kaneko,
Takayoshi Masui, and Daisuke Arai
Hull Form Optimization to Fulfil Minimum Propulsion Power
by Using Frequency and Time Domain Potential Flow Solvers . . . . . . . 220
Jaekyung Heo, Daehwan Park, Jan Henrik Berg-Jensen, Zhiyuan Pan,
and Torgeir Kirkhorn Vada
Welding and Construction
Controller Design of a Gantry Crane for the Safe Erection of Blocks
in Shipyards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Hye-Won Lee, Myung-Il Roh, Seung-Ho Ham, and Do-Hyun Chun
A Study on Using Hot-Rolled Steel Sheet for Ship Superstructure . . . . . 243
Hisao Narimatsu, Masakazu Kuwada, and Koji Gotoh
Overview of the Joint Industrial Project for Practical Application
of Laser-Arc Hybrid Welding in Construction of General Merchant
Ships in Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258
Koji Gotoh, Takamori Uemura, Issei Uchino, Hisao Narimatsu,
Toshimitsu Maeda, Takumi Torigoe, and Atsuo Moriyama
Contents xi

Control of Car Decks Welding Deformation in RO-RO Ships . . . . . . . . 273

Junichi Toyoshima, Kiyoharu Hayashi, Mikikazu Murakami,
Masanori Sano, Shogo Imasaki, Yasuo Katayama, Hidekazu Murakawa,
Naoki Osawa, and Sherif Rashed
Big Data in Ship Design and Construction
Development of Basic Planning Support System Using
Marine Logistics Big Data and Its Application to Ship
Basic Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Kunihiro Hamada, Noritaka Hirata, Kai Ihara,
Dimas Angga Fakhri Muzhoffar, and Mohammad Danil Arifin
Evaluation Method for the Maximum Wave Load Based on AIS
and Hindcast Wave Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308
Masayoshi Oka, Tomoki Takami, and Chong Ma
“Monitoring Platform” of Monitoring and Visualizing System
for Shipyard: Application to Cutting and Subassembly Processes . . . . . 321
Kazuhiro Aoyama, Takayuki Yotsuzuka, Yoshiki Tanaka,
and Yoshikazu Tanabe
Monitoring Systems in Design of Ships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
Serena Lim, Kayvan Pazouki, and Alan J. Murphy
Performance of Ships in Ice
Ice Resistance Calculation in Pack Ice Conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349
Guiyong Zhang, Biye Yang, Yuyan Jiang, and Zhe Sun
On the Development of the Arc7 LNG Carrier – Hull
Form Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363
Ho-Jeong Lim, Ji-In Park, Sahng-Hyon Lee, Sung-Pyo Kim,
and Joong Kyoo Kang
A New Technique for Prediction of Ship-Ice Floes Interaction
Without Fluids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
Donghwa Han, Joonmo Choung, and Kuk-Jin Kang
Study on Estimation of Ice Resistance and Attainable Speed for Ship
of Arbitrary Shape . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383
Hyun-Soo Kim, Donghwa Han, and Ali Erinc Ozden
Estimation of Ice Conditions Along the Northern Sea Route . . . . . . . . . 397
Wei Chai, Bernt J. Leira, Chana Sinsabvarodom, and Wei Shi
Effect of Ship Speed on Bow Impact Load Estimation for Polar
Class Ship Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Mahmud Sazidy, Claude Daley, Bruce Colbourne, and John MacKay
xii Contents

Navigation and Logistics

Safety vs. Sustainability – How Much Underpowering of Ships
Is Acceptable? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423
Stefan Krüger, Michal Josten, and Leonidas Souflis
Sustainability Assessment of Small Scale Fishing Vessel Operations:
A Case Study in Palabuhanratu, Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 436
Vita R. Kurniawati, Richard W. Birmingham, and Alan J. Murphy
Assessing Port Congestion Using Ship Movement Data:
A Case Study of Tianjin Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462
Guanlan Liu, Alessio Tei, and Alan J. Murphy
Numerical Simulation of Hybrid Platform Supply Vessel (PSV)
Fuel Consumption for the Pre-Salt Layer in Brazil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 478
Kazuo Nishimoto, Claudio M. P. Sampaio, Rodrigo J. Vale,
and Felipe Ruggeri
Optimization of River-Sea-Going Ship Type Scheme and Operation
Strategy Under Emission Control Area in China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 498
Xinjing Tan, Wei Cai, and Chao Liu
Estimation of the Collision Risk on Planned Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 516
Makiko Minami and Ruri Shoji
Autonomous Route Planning for Ships in Complex Waterways . . . . . . . 533
Jinsong Xu, Chunxiao Hou, Rongwu Yang, and Ge (George) Wang

Ocean Engineering
Hydrodynamic Analysis of Offshore Aquaculture Platform and Its
Mooring Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 551
Jun Yu, Xiaoming Cheng, and Xiaofeng Wu
Prediction of Extreme Nonlinear Hydrodynamic Responses
and Mooring Line Loads of Floating Offshore Structures . . . . . . . . . . . 564
Dong-Hyun Lim, Yonghwan Kim, and Seung-Hoon Lee
Design Automation of Mooring Systems for Floating Structures . . . . . . 579
Bo Wu, Xiaoming Cheng, Ying Chen, Xinyun Ni, and Kai Zhang
A Study of Riser Oscillations Caused by Slug Flows During Subsea
Petroleum Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 595
Sergio Nascimento Bordalo and Celso Kazuyuki Morooka
A Simplified Nonlinear Analysis Procedure for the Flexible Risers
in Subjected to Combined Loading Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614
Jeong Du Kim and Beom-Seon Jang
Contents xiii

Modal Parameter Identification of an Electrical Submersible Pump

Installed in a Test Well Using Drop Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 631
Ulisses A. Monteiro, Ricardo S. Minette, Ricardo H. R. Gutiérrez,
and Luiz A. Vaz
Fatigue Analysis of Vortex-Induced Vibration for Marine Risers
with Top-End Platform Motion Excitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639
Yuchao Yuan, Hongxiang Xue, Wenyong Tang, and Jun Liu
Real Time Estimation of Local Wave Characteristics from Ship
Motions Using Artificial Neural Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 657
Bulent Duz, Bart Mak, Remco Hageman, and Nicola Grasso
Nonlinear Wave Loads on Deep-Water Semisubmersibles . . . . . . . . . . . 679
Rahul Manohar, Xin Wang, Velizar Prampakov, and Arun Dev
Experimental and Numerical Comparisons of a Floating Absorber
Wave Energy Converter in Regular Waves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697
A. Novás-Cortés, L. Santiago-Caamaño, M. Miguez-González,
and V. Díaz-Casas
Study on Motion Response of a Floating Offshore Turbines’ Unit
with OWC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 707
Motohiko Murai and Ryohei Mochiduki
Development and Design of a Floating Type Ocean Current
Turbine System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 732
Yasushi Dodo, Shigeki Nagaya, Tetsuo Okada, Makoto Toyoda,
and Akio Ito

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 757

Design and Construction
 A Bayesian Network Approach to
Evaluate Shipboard Launch and Recovery
Performance in Early-Stage Ship Design

James A. Coller(B) and David J. Singer

Department of Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering,

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
[email protected]
https://ancr.engin.umich.edu/

Abstract. Vessel performance in shipboard launch and recovery oper-

ations is a critical element of its overall mission effectiveness. Both com-
mercial and military vessels are required to launch and recover a vari-
ety of manned and unmanned platforms including submersibles, small
boats, aircraft, and amphibious vehicles. A fundamental attribute of
these launch and recovery operations is their dependence on a number
of probabilistic factors such as environmental conditions and design fac-
tors associated with the vessel and the platforms. To facilitate effective
launch and recovery operations, ship designers require a design method
that takes into account these probabilistic factors to gain a better under-
standing the implications of launch and recovery on a variety of early
stage design decisions. Recent advancements in design tools and method-
ologies have pushed critical decisions earlier in the design process which
necessitates evaluating mission critical systems sooner as well.
This paper presents an application of Bayesian networks for evaluating
the performance of shipboard launch and recovery operations. Bayesian
networks provide a framework for understanding system interdependen-
cies by modeling and analyzing conditional probabilities between vari-
able pairs. In previous ship design research, Bayesian networks have been
applied to risk modeling and the examination of principal particulars.
This research utilizes Bayesian networks to model the environmen-
tal and design factors that contribute to the performance of launch and
recovery operations, using a level of information that is consistent with
early-stage ship design. These networks are analyzed and examined to
assess the impact of the overall design attributes on those factors. A ship
design case study is presented to demonstrate the method and elucidate
the driving interdependencies in launch and recovery operations.

Keywords: Bayesian networks · Ship design · Launch and recovery ·

Design tools · Unmanned vehicles · Causal dependency

c Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021

T. Okada et al. (Eds.): PRADS 2019, LNCE 65, pp. 3–23, 2021.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-4680-8_1
4 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

1 Introduction
1.1 Problem and Approach

Advancements in naval architecture continue to push the boundaries of how

much of the design space can be explored for a given ship within time and
budgetary constraints. With methodologies that require large portions of the
design space to be investigated, such as set based design (SBD), [1] the design
space needs to be explored in a computationally efficient manner while providing
novel information that enables decision making with limited information.
Early stage design requires efficient design tools to effectively examine a given
design and evaluate the design performance [2]. These tools are used to evaluate
the potential ship designs and ensure that the key design requirements are met.
While these tools have inherent biases and will have an impact on the decision
making process [3], they remain necessary in modern ship design.
Naval ships are often tasked with the launch and recovery of additional
systems, both manned and unmanned, including boats, helicopters, unmanned
underwater vehicles (UUVs), unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and unmanned
surface vehicles (USVs). The design of the ship can have a large impact on the
effectiveness of these operations, in addition to environmental conditions and
operating procedures. Design features such as well decks, stern ramps, davits,
cranes, and helicopter pads can be complicated to integrate and evaluate.
As the use of unmanned vehicles increases, these operations will continue to
increase in complexity. The US Navy has stated it plans to continue rolling out
unmanned vehicles to integrate with the fleet, across the skies [4], the surface
[5], and subsea [6]. Unmanned and autonomous vehicles can be more difficult
to launch and recover without human operator guidance and with an increased
number of systems that must flawlessly execute.
This paper investigates a novel approach to this problem by using a Bayesian
network to evaluate the environmental and ship design factors for a shipboard
launch and recovery system. The Bayesian Network will allow the designer to
evaluate the interdependencies of the design decision and evaluate the expected
satisfaction with the overall design. The network structure allows the designer
to simulate satisfaction for a wide range of vehicles and complex systems.
The goal of this paper is not to prove the specific network structure is correct,
but rather to show that the use of a Bayesian framework can be beneficial to early
stage designers. The specific network definition is dependent upon an individual
design.
In the remainder of the paper, an introduction to launch and recovery sys-
tems and Bayesian networks will be presented. The methodology is explained,
and a case study is presented to highlight the network structure and examine
variable sensitivity. Additional opportunities for further work and implications
are discussed.
 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 5

1.2 Launch and Recovery Design Space

In naval ship design, many mission profiles include launching and recovering any
number of other vehicles from the ship platform. A given design may be tasked
with having several launch and recovery areas such as well decks, flight decks,
and davits [7,8]. Multi-mission ships are tasked with flexible spaces that can
serve a wide variety of mission capabilities depending on the call to service and
the changing geo-political climate [9,10].
Within this design space, the possible vehicles to be launched or recovered are
numerous. Categorically, they include aerial, surface, and subsea vehicles. Within
these categories, dozens to thousands of variants exist. Figures 1 and 2 highlight
some of the variety a single ship may see. Additional unique missions may include
recovering non-propulsive vehicles such as a NASA landing module [11].

Fig. 1. Sailors launch the Rigid Hull Fig. 2. A landing craft, air cushion
Inflatable Boat (RHIB) aboard the (LCAC) is launched from the well
guided-missile destroyer USS Russell deck of the USS Boxer (LHD 4).
(DDG 59). US Navy Released Photo, US Navy Released Photo, 190116-N-
060619-N-4166B-009. SH168-1054.

The launch and recovery spaces of a ship can have large impacts on the overall
ship design. Some launch and recovery systems will dictate large portions of the
ship arrangements and will be primary design drivers such as flight decks, well
decks, and stern ramps. Other systems, such as davits and articulating cranes,
will have minimal impact on the overall design. This makes the analysis of the
design alternatives an important aspect of the overall design process.

1.3 Bayesian Networks

Bayesian networks are a type of directed acyclic graph (DAG) encoded with
conditional probability distributions. The network allows the expression of rela-
tionships which can result in simplified knowledge generation and transparency
to relationship dependencies. Bayesian networks allow for both top-down and
bottom-up reasoning, which means that the outcome can be predicted, given
a set of inputs, or given an outcome, the root cause of the outcome can be
identified [12].
6 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

Bayesian networks are directed graphs, meaning they show the direction-
ality of relationships. Bayesian networks rely on the use of Baye’s Theorem for
Bayesian inference, shown in Eq. 1. The posterior distribution, P (θ|y), represents
the probability that is the basis for action, given collected knowledge, y. This
utilizes information from a prior distribution, P (θ), and the likelihood function,
P (y|θ).
P (y|θ)P (θ)
P (θ|y) = (1)
P (y)
The marginal distribution, P (y), is a normalizing constant that is often disre-
garded, as it can be difficult to determine [13], and the result is that in Bayesian
inference we may only show the proportionality of the posterior to the likelihood
and prior, shown in Eq. 2.

P (θ|y) ∝ P (y|θ)P (θ) (2)

Bayesian networks rely on joint probability distributions to combine parent

nodes for the child node. In this probabilistic model, each variable, Xi is repre-
sented as a node on the DAG. The probability distribution P (X1 , X2 , ..., Xn ) is
represented as follows:

n
P (X1 , X2 , ..., Xn ) = P (Xi |ΠXi ) (3)
i=1

where ΠXi represents the set of nodes that are the parents to Xi in the network
topology.
Bayesian networks are widely used in engineering and defense research.
Bayesian networks have been used to predict drinking water distribution pipe
breaks [14]. They have also been used for probabilistic assessments for nuclear
waste disposal [15], and predicting air defense threats [16]. In marine structural
engineering, they have been used in structural performance and reliability mod-
els [17]. There have been some limited applications in marine design [18], and in
marine decision making [19].
In some of these cases, the network topology was learned from the data [14],
while in others it was determined by the authors [16,17].

2 Methodology
The Bayesian framework examined in this paper can be adapted to any network
structure. The network structure should be set based on the specific design sce-
nario and structure of a given ship design project by the designers. The network
should be representative of the ship design and factors under consideration.
For the purposes of examining the Bayesian network framework, we will
use an existing sample network. The network structure for this methodology is
adapted from an influence diagram created by Wireman, 2019 [20]. This model
is intended to show the ability of Bayesian Networks to examine a ship design,
 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 7

and does not necessarily try to perfectly model individual variables such as crane
operating capacities.
In the network, the top level nodes, represented by squares, are the primary
input variables. The middle level nodes, represented by circles, are intermediate
variables that are of importance and are dependent upon the input nodes. Lastly,
the output nodes, represented by diamonds and a hexagon, are calculated metrics
that give probabilistic outputs based on the input and intermediate nodes. In
the structure, the directed edges between nodes represent the dependencies.
The top level and intermediate nodes are established by the design team.
These nodes should represent the high level inputs under consideration and the
functional dependencies that map from them. These nodes will change between
ships, but this current format gives one example of how this can be done.
The previous influence diagram structure was slightly modified. The variables
included are described further in Tables 1 and 2. The full network structure is
shown in Fig. 3, with the four primary subtrees shown separately in Figs. 4, 5, 6
and 7.
All modeling was performed in Python 2.7. All graphing of the networks was
performed using the NetworkX, [21], and Graphviz, [22], packages for Python.

Fig. 3. The full network tree developed. Closer views of the four primary subtrees are
shown in Figs. 4, 5, 6, and 7.
8 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

The model takes in 14 primary input variables, listed in Table 1, which are the
first nodes below each of the four variable categories. From here, the input nodes
are passed to the first layer of calculated intermediate nodes. These intermediate
nodes utilize joint conditional probability tables to determine the outcome of the
input node. These joint conditional probability tables are shown in Tables 3, 4,
5, 6 and 7.
In instances where the input variable is a rating, Table 3 is used to determine
the probability that the outcome will be satisfactory. Table 4 is used for vari-
ables where the weight of the launch or recovery vehicle is dependent. Table 5 is
for variables that are dependent on the vehicle volume, Table 6 is for variables
dependent on the ship freeboard, and Table 7 is used for variables dependent on
the crew size.
In this method, P (θ) is the probability of a satisfactory design outcome, given
observations yi . There are several intermediate satisfaction metrics, including
Freeboard Satisfaction, θf , Arrangement Flexibility Satisfaction, θa , Manning
Satisfaction, θm , Performance Satisfaction, θp , and Vehicle Interoperability Sat-
isfaction, θi .
The probability of a satisfactory design outcome was the metric chosen as
the key performance indicator to evaluate the overall design effectiveness from
the network. This metric could have been any number of things including cost
effectiveness or mission effectiveness. This metric was chosen for its simplicity.
There are multiple intermediate variables which contribute to the knowledge
base. In most cases, these are calculated as:


N
P (θchild ) = P (θparent,i |yi ) (4)
i=1

where the child nodes are the dependent intermediate nodes, and the N parent
nodes are the nodes above them in the hierarchy which have edges leading to
the child signifying dependence. The parent probabilities are calculated using
the conditional probability tables previously described.
In the case of the probabilistic estimate of the actual capacity of the launch
and recovery system, Ca , it is calculated as follows:

Ca = Cr − 0.5I (5)

where Cr is the rated capacity, and I is the impact of the other dependent nodes,
which is calculated as:

I = Cr (1 − P (θ|ywind )P (θ|yss )) (6)

where P (θ|ywind ) and P (θ|yss ) are the conditional probabilities from the impact
of the wind and the sea state, respectively.
 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 9

Table 1. Variables included in the Bayesian network.

Item Description
Host vessel The ship that the secondary vehicle is being
launched from or recovered onto
Arrangement flexibility* Rating of if the ship design’s arrangement is flexible
Crew size* Total number of crew members on the host vessel
Minimum freeboard* Minimum freeboard required for the ship, in meters
Available manning Probability there will be enough crew to man the
launch/recovery
Vehicle The vehicle being launched or recovered
Vehicle volume* The volume of the vehicle, in cubic meters
Vehicle weight* The weight of the vehicle, in metric tons
Variability of vehicle type* Rating of the variability of other vehicles of the same
type
L/R flexibility* Rating of the flexibility the vehicle has for multiple
launch/recovery methods
Vehicle complexity* Rating of how complex the vehicle is to
launch/recover
L/R system The launch or recovery system
System requirements* Rating of the overall requirements of the
launch/recovery system
Arrangement impact Probability that the system does not heavily impact
the ship design’s arrangements
Required manning Probability that the manning requirement of the
system can be satisfied
Freeboard flexibility* Rating of the flexibility of the system to deal with
various freeboard amounts
Relative height* Rating of how close to the water level or top of the
ship the system is
Simplicity of L/R Probability that the system will be simple to execute
Rated capacity* The rated capacity of the system, in metric tons
Actual capacity A probabilistically determined capacity of the system
Environment The environmental conditions
Sea state rating* Rating of the sea state condition and impact on the
launch and recovery
Wind speeds* Rating of the wind conditions and impact on the
launch and recovery
Freeboard available Probability of environmental impacts on the
freeboard
* Denotes input variables to the network
10 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

Table 2. The satisfaction variables included in the Bayesian network.

Item Description
Arrangement satisfaction Probability that the arrangement of the ship is
satisfactory
Manning satisfaction Probability that the manning levels are satisfactory
Freeboard satisfaction Probability that the freeboard levels will be
satisfactory
Performance satisfaction Probability that the performance of the
launch/recovery will be satisfactory
Interoperability satisfaction Probability that the interoperability of multiple
vehicles will be satisfactory
Overall satisfaction Overall probability of satisfaction

Table 3. The conditional proba- Table 4. The conditional proba-

bility table for the rated variables. bility table for the mass variables.

Rating P (Satisfactory) Mass (mt) P (Satisfactory)

1 0.99 1 0.99
2 0.98 5 0.98
3 0.95 10 0.95
4 0.80 20 0.90
5 0.50 30 0.80
6 0.20 40 0.70
7 0.10 50 0.60
8 0.05 100 0.40
9 0.01 200 0.30

In the case of the Performance Satisfaction, the weight of the vehicle needs
to be considered compared to the actual capacity of the launch and recovery
system. In this case, the probability of satisfaction is calculated as follows:

0.01, if W > Ca
P (θp ) = (7)
P (θ|ycmplx )((1 − W/Ca ) + 0.25), otherwise

where W is the weight of the vehicle, P (θ|ycmplx ) is the probability of satisfaction

given the complexity of the vehicle, and ((1 − W/Ca ) + 0.25) is capped at 1.0.
The overall satisfaction, P (θ), is computed as the geometric mean of
P (θf,a,m,p,i ):
P (θ) = [P (θf )P (θa )P (θm )P (θp )P (θi )]1/5 (8)
 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 11

Table 5. The conditional proba- Table 6. The conditional proba-

bility table for the volumetric vari- bility table for the freeboard vari-
ables. ables.

Volume (m3 ) P (Satisfactory) Fbd Min (m) P (Satisfactory)

0.1 0.99 0.5 0.99
1.0 0.95 1.0 0.95
5.0 0.85 2.0 0.85
10.0 0.75 3.0 0.75
20.0 0.55 4.0 0.65
30.0 0.40 5.0 0.55
40.0 0.30 6.0 0.45
50.0 0.22 7.0 0.35
75.0 0.10 8.0 0.25
100.0 0.05 9.0 0.15
150.0 0.01 10.0 0.05

Table 7. The conditional probability table for the crew-based variables.

Crew size P (Satisfactory)

5 0.01
10 0.08
15 0.15
20 0.20
30 0.30
40 0.40
50 0.50
60 0.60
80 0.72
100 0.80
150 0.90
200 0.95
400 0.99
12 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

Fig. 4. The Host Vessel portion of the network is shown.

Fig. 5. The Vehicle portion of the network is shown.

 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 13

Fig. 6. The Launch and Recovery System portion of the network is shown.

Fig. 7. The Environmental portion of the network is shown.

14 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

3 Model Sensitivity
To examine the effectiveness of the proposed model, a simple sensitivity analysis
is examined. A sample hose vessel, vehicle, launch and recovery system, and envi-
ronmental conditions are proposed. From this baseline, each variable is changed
independent of the rest between the minimum and maximum values assessed in
the conditional probability tables. The baseline input variables, as well as the
maximum and minimum values, are shown in Table 8.

Table 8. The input variables for the case study. The baseline value is shown along
with the minimum and maximum values used in the simulation.

Input variable Value

Baseline Min Max
Host ship Arrangement flexibility 3 1 9
Crew size 200 5 400
Freeboard minimum 1 1 9
Vehicle Volume [m3 ] 15 0.1 150
Weight [mt] 20 0.5 200
Variability 3 1 9
Flexibility 3 1 9
Complexity 2 1 9
L/R system System requirements 2 1 9
Freeboard flexibility 2 1 9
Relative height 2 1 9
Capacity [mt] 40 0.5 300
Environment Sea state 2 1 9
Wind 2 1 9

The baseline variable selection results in an overall probability of satisfaction

of 0.76. This is reflected in Fig. 8 and Table 9. As shown, under the baseline

Table 9. The results of the baseline variables through the network.

Variable Value
P (θ) 0.76
P (θf ) 0.91
P (θa ) 0.69
P (θm ) 0.63
P (θp ) 0.69
P (θi ) 0.95
 Bayesian Networks in Ship Design 15

conditions the overall satisfaction is being driven positively by the vehicle inter-
operability and is being driven negatively by the manning requirement.

Fig. 8. The baseline performance data from the initial simulation. The overall sat-
isfaction is 0.76, which is largely driven down by the poor probability of manning
satisfaction, arrangement flexibility, and performance.

Using this baseline data as a starting point, 134 test cases are simulated by
varying each input variable independently. From this data, the most useful data
was determined to be the maximum, minimum, and the difference between the
maximum and minimum values for each of the satisfaction probabilities. This
data is shown in Table 10 and Table 11.
We can validate the model by examining the edge cases. Conceptually, if
the sea state is extremely large, the probability of a positive outcome with high
satisfaction is low.
This is accurately depicted in Table 10, where min(P (θ)) = 0.02 corresponds
to the worst sea state condition. Similarly, not having enough crew to perform
the task, having extreme system requirements, having a very complex vehicle,
or having a heavy vehicle with a medium capacity launch/recovery system all
result in low probabilities of satisfaction. This makes sense given our intuition.
Conversely, we can see improvements over the baseline across the board as
we loosen restrictions on the maximum value side of Table 10. Many variables
were already near their best case scenarios in the baseline, so only minimal gains
were observed. However in the cases of the variables where the baseline was of
moderate difficulty (vehicle weight, launch system capacity), larger changes were
observed, as expected. In no case do we expect a perfect situation, given the rest
of the baseline variables, which is why the overall satisfaction is never expected
above 0.89.
16 J. A. Coller and D. J. Singer

Table 10. The minimum and maximum results from the simulation.

Input variable Minimum output Maximum output

P (θ) P (θf ) P (θa ) P (θm ) P (θp ) P (θi ) P (θ) P (θf ) P (θa ) P (θm ) P (θp ) P (θi )
Arr flexibility 0.31 0.91 0.01 0.63 0.69 0.95 0.77 0.91 0.72 0.63 0.69 0.95
Crew size 0.31 0.91 0.69 0.01 0.69 0.95 0.77 0.91 0.69 0.66 0.69 0.95
Fbd minimum 0.53 0.14 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.95 0.76 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.95
Volume 0.75 0.91 0.61 0.63 0.69 0.95 0.78 0.91 0.76 0.63 0.69 0.95
Weight 0.26 0.91 0.69 0.21 0.01 0.95 0.83 0.91 0.69 0.69 0.92 0.95
Variability 0.56 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.20 0.77 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.98
Flexibility 0.56 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.20 0.77 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.69 0.98
Complexity 0.31 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.01 0.95 0.77 0.91 0.69 0.63 0.70 0.95
Sys requirements 0.12 0.91 0.01 0.01 0.69 0.95 0.85 0.91 0.94 0.78 0.69 0.95
Fbd flexibility 0.34 0.01 0.92 0.77 0.69 0.95 0.85 0.92 0.92 0.77 0.69 0.95
Relative height 0.34 0.91 0.92 0.77 0.01 0.95 0.85 0.91 0.92 0.77 0.70 0.95
Capacity 0.36 0.91 0.92 0.77 0.01 0.95 0.89 0.91 0.92 0.77 0.92 0.95
Sea state 0.02 0.01 0.69 0.00 0.01 0.95 0.77 0.92 0.69 0.64 0.70 0.95
Wind 0.05 0.91 0.69 0.00 0.01 0.95 0.77 0.91 0.69 0.64 0.70 0.95

Table 11. The difference between the minimum and maximum results of the simula-
tion. A zero indicates that the input variable has no influence on the output.

Input variable Max-Min

P (θ) P (θf ) P (θa ) P (θm ) P (θp ) P (θi )
Host ship Arrangement flexibility 0.46 0.00 0.71 0.00 0.00 0.00
Crew size 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.65 0.00 0.00
Freeboard minimum 0.24 0.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Vehicle Volume 0.03 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00
Weight 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.91 0.00
Variability 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78
Flexibility 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78
Complexity 0.46 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.00
L/R system System requirements 0.73 0.00 0.93 0.77 0.00 0.00
Freeboard flexibility 0.51 0.91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Relative height 0.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.00
Capacity 0.53 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.91 0.00
Environment Sea state 0.75 0.91 0.00 0.64 0.69 0.00
Wind 0.72 0.00 0.00 0.64 0.69 0.00

These data allow the identification of the key variables in the design by
examining the differences between their minimum and maximum values across
the various metrics, shown in Table 11. A result of zero indicates that the variable
has no influence on the predicted satisfaction. A low number indicates it has low
impact, and a high number indicates that it has a large impact. In this case,
the data show that the environment has the largest impact on the overall design
satisfaction outcome.
Another Random Scribd Document
with Unrelated Content
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

textbookfull.com